Comments on: The End of the Scientific Method http://dd.dynamicdiagrams.com/2008/07/the-end-of-the-scientific-method/ Dynamic Diagrams' take on the world of visual explanation, information architecture, design, and technology Thu, 19 Jan 2012 19:41:06 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.1 By: Henry Woodbury http://dd.dynamicdiagrams.com/2008/07/the-end-of-the-scientific-method/comment-page-1/#comment-77 Henry Woodbury Thu, 17 Jul 2008 18:43:52 +0000 http://dd.dynamicdiagrams.com/?p=515#comment-77 Anderson is partly right in that computers have created a field of study sometimes called "experimental mathematics." But otherwise, he sounds a little starstruck. Having a lot of data doesn't do much unless you know what you're looking for. Anderson's example of J. Craig Venter's research sounds impressive, but it doesn't help Anderson's thesis. Venter, after all, had a hypothesis and a model and a test. He had a model for the type of data he was looking for, a hypothesis for where to look for it, and a sequencing test to determine if he found it. So today's experimentalists have better tools at their disposal than those in the past. Other than that, what's Anderson's point? Anderson is partly right in that computers have created a field of study sometimes called “experimental mathematics.”

But otherwise, he sounds a little starstruck. Having a lot of data doesn’t do much unless you know what you’re looking for. Anderson’s example of J. Craig Venter’s research sounds impressive, but it doesn’t help Anderson’s thesis. Venter, after all, had a hypothesis and a model and a test. He had a model for the type of data he was looking for, a hypothesis for where to look for it, and a sequencing test to determine if he found it.

So today’s experimentalists have better tools at their disposal than those in the past. Other than that, what’s Anderson’s point?

]]> By: Lisa Agustin http://dd.dynamicdiagrams.com/2008/07/the-end-of-the-scientific-method/comment-page-1/#comment-76 Lisa Agustin Thu, 17 Jul 2008 15:56:11 +0000 http://dd.dynamicdiagrams.com/?p=515#comment-76 Looks like I'm not the only one that thinks Anderson's approach is a little drastic: Cosmic Variance noted: "Sometimes it will be hard, or impossible, to discover simple models explaining huge collections of messy data taken from noisy, nonlinear phenomena. But it doesn't mean we shouldn't try. Hypotheses aren't simply useful tools in some potentially outmoded vision of science; they are the whole point. Theory is understanding, and understanding our world is what science is all about." (see http://cosmicvariance.com/2008/07/01/what-good-is-a-theory/) Looks like I’m not the only one that thinks Anderson’s approach is a little drastic: Cosmic Variance noted:

“Sometimes it will be hard, or impossible, to discover simple models explaining huge collections of messy data taken from noisy, nonlinear phenomena. But it doesn’t mean we shouldn’t try. Hypotheses aren’t simply useful tools in some potentially outmoded vision of science; they are the whole point. Theory is understanding, and understanding our world is what science is all about.” (see http://cosmicvariance.com/2008/07/01/what-good-is-a-theory/)

]]>